Being intelligent is a huge adaptive advantage;so, why the smarter are so scarce and mediocres abound ?

Answer 1

It used to be survival of the fittest. Now we have laws that protect the dumb. No matter how hard they try though politicians cannot legislate stupid away. No we just allow them to breed!

Answer 2

From an evolutionary standpoint, every member of the race doesn't need to display high intelligence. In any population, there is going to be a range of intelligence. Given that we are here, I conclude empirically that up to now at least, the human race has been intelligent enough on the average.

Also, there are many different forms of intelligence. Was Albert Einstein more intelligent than Johnny Unitas? I'm guessing Johnny would have been better against the blitz or an attacking saber-tooth cat than Al.

If you look at group dynamics, you'll see that maybe one person in twenty has what it takes to be a good leader. This may not be an evolutionary mistake; with nineteen good followers (or more commonly, seventeen and a couple of slackers) a leader can get a lot done. Nature doesn't care if it's optimal, as long as it works.

Answer 3

Hmm... Being intelligent is probably a huge advantage when we compare ourselves to other animals. Is that statement still true among humans? Maybe not, or perhaps, not to the extend that we may think. Being successful in human environments, does not always require that we be the most intelligent. In fact, cases abound when intelligence is trumped by other characteristics, such as sexual attractiveness, physical strength, brutality, cunniness, deceit, just to name a few. Perhaps, intelligence as defined conventionally, is simply not enough. One case sample may be that of politicians. Though it may not be a bad idea, when was the last time, you saw a scientist lead our nation, as president? Why is it that it's always the rich and cunning ones that succeed in becoming president? There are many times, when being decisive and acting strong will win you more survival points than just being smart. We've all seen it, a pretty girl in the arms of a guy who looks like a loser, and has no future. You may have said to yourself, "what does she see in him?" ... sorry don't mean to insult anyone here; just trying to illustrate a point...and the point is intelligence is not always enough. It helps, but it's not everything. A lot of times, it is doing the right thing, at the right time that matters, and those actions do not require you to be a rocket scientist. Au contraire, it is often the case that you have to just throw caution to the winds and just act on impulse. The most successful people in our society are not the so called "smart" ones; rather, they are the ones who dare, the ones who risk, and take chances.

Answer 4

I need to set some background here. Just what do we mean by "intelligence"?

One theory concerning human intelligence is that it has been socially driven; unlike animals, who are concerned with their immediate survival, we humans must take into account the consequences of our actions; our social status, our prospects for a mate, etc.

In other words, there's a co-evolution here. There is no question that our intelligence allows us to act with foresight. Picture some Plains Indians chasing some buffalo off a cliff; the Indians use their capacity to anticipate the future against the buffalo, who are forced to react from moment to moment, choosing the only route to "safety" that appears obvious to them, until it's too late.

But wait! We're not just intelligent as individuals. We must be taught language. We must be taught right and wrong. These are the classic functions of family and more broadly of our tribe and nation.

Our intelligence comes in handy as a survival advantage among our fellow critters, but in fact we mostly use it to survive in human society. The brainier we are, the farther we can anticipate the future - and the more complex society becomes, forcing us to become even brainer.

Now, why does intelligence follow the kind of distribution you discern - i.e. many "mediocres" to a few "brights"?

Again, I don't have a pail full of answers here, but two observations suggest themselves:

a. So some folks are geniuses. What of it? So long as you can compete in human society, (and let's not underestimate what that takes) you are by definition an evolutionary success, because you are part of a wildly successful, adaptive species.

b. Does anything make you think that the "center," or average, of this distribution hasn't moved higher with time? In other words, just because a few people are much smarter than others doesn't mean that there's no general increase in intelligence happening over thousands of years.

Answer 5

I think that you have made an assumption about intelligence that may not be true. What makes you think that it is a huge adaptive advantage? If your assumption is true then wouldn't there be more "smarter" people around? And your second assumption, that there are more mediocre people, may also be false. If there is more mediocrity, being intelligent can't be a huge adaptive advantage. Perhaps being mediocre makes it less likely that you can spot "smarter" people.
And besides, one definition of mediocrity is averageness meaning there are as many people above average as below.

Answer 6

I think rhsaunders has it about right. There is very little evolutionary pressure today. Due to modern medicine and technology, most individuals survive, smart or, as you so tactfully put it, mediocre.

It used to be that the not-so-brights wouldn't live very long. Now everybody lives at least to reproduce. And, unfortunately, the not-so-brights tend to have more babies. If you do a little checking on this you can find the data for yourself. The better educated have 1 to 3 children, typically. The not-so-brights don't seem to understand what causes pregnancy and have more kids. Maybe they just don't care. You probably know somebody that isn't the brightest bulb in the carton and he has how many kids?

Answer 7

De-evolution, Social castes, and pure genetics.

Smart people are every day creating something that will make lives easier, make lives longer, and help babies that can't support their own lives. Our technology has made us a soft species. We continually keep the weak alive, and make the strong pay for it to happen.

If dumb people didn't buy things like pet rocks, the brilliant guy that came up with it would have never made money. In other words, in order to live a comfortable life, smart people need dumb people to do stuff like pick fruit and veggies, and heard cattle, and tedious labor.

I would also think that intelligence is a recessive trait. Otherwise there would be no point in further evolving the mind. That's obviously not the reality of the situation, so, using secular logic, I prove my point... Still workin' on real proof though!

Safety in numbers is found throughout the animal kingdom... most animals of prey travel in numbers, to help with the predators. Stupid people are the same way. They travel in numbers, and could easily destroy the minority that is intellectual people.

Answer 8

Thinly veiled attempt at "proving" evolution is BS, right???

I suppose that the reason mediocrity abounds is because religion enforces it. Until we let go of ridiculous dogmatic thoughts and ideaologies, we will never advance as a civilization. this is why intelligence doesnt "win out" over mediocrity.

Of course, I can always point out the idiots that step in front of moving trains and get killed or a myriad of other moronic actions that have led to the deaths of thousands of mediocre people...

Answer 9

Because there is no longer much evolutionary pressure to weed out mediocres. Back in the old days (hundreds of thousands of years ago), a stupid person was much more likely to be eaten than one who watched out for lions. Nowadays, almost anyone can survive, intelligent or not, and reproduce as well, so there is much less premium on intelligence.

Answer 10

To apply your question to our largest environment, the ocean, here is one answer.

In the ocean the most abundant creatures are part of the zooplankton, which consist of the nymphs of thousands of different creatures ranging in diversity from common shellfish to giant squid.

The most intelligent creatures are the dolphins, whose brains are much bigger than ours. They are arguably more intelligent than us too!

Without the zooplankton, the dolphins' food chain would disappear. There are no more dolphins than our oceans presently can support. If their ecological niche expands, there will be more room for more dolphins.

So, to answer your question, yes intelligence is an advantage, but there are only as many creatures as their ecological niche provides.

With humans, we have taken ourselves out of the equation by artificially altering our environment. So your question can't be logically applied to humans. Also, your term "mediocre" isn't necessarily the opposite of intelligence. Unintelligent or less intelligent is a more accurate way to describe it.

Hope this helps.

Answer 11

It depends on what environment you are in. Sure humans are smart, some are very smart, and those excel in society, but look around, intelligence is only most useful in society, which is a manmade environment that we created to especially cater to our intelligence.

If you dropped a nerdy guy off in the jungle, what happens? Gets mauled by a cougar or something. That's because THOSE animals are still best adapted for THEIR native environment, where intelligence and the ability to use tools isn't as important as stealth, speed, and killing prowess.